 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Legislative advocacy
The following article originally appeared in Salt of the Earth. It is posted here for private use only. It may not be reprinted in whole or in part without the permission of Salt of the Earth magazine.
Capitol gains:
How Catholics keep faith with the political system
An interview with John Carr [Part I]
IT'S BAD ENOUGH FORM TO BRING up religion or politics at the family picnic, but talking about religion and politics is bound to get you into trouble. Today, however, more and more people are realizing that there is no way to keep the two separate and that Christians, if they take their faith seriously, have a responsibility to act on and advocate for its values in the political arena.
In recent years, the U.S. Catholic bishops have made considerable waves by issuing pastoral letters and other statements on public-policy issues such as war and peace, abortion, the economy, children and families, and welfare reform. But, as John Carr, the bishops' Secretary for Social Development and World Peace, explains, they don't just write lengthy epistles. Working through Carr's department, the bishops have been actively pursuing a Catholic agenda in Washington that puts the defense of human life and dignity first.
AS THE U.S. CATHOLIC BISHOPS' Secretary for Social Development and World Peace, what are some of the things you do?
I HAVE A GREAT JOB, but a lousy title. The title sort of combines Washington pomp and ecclesiastical arrogance.
At the bishops' meeting last summer in Chicago, a couple in the hotel lobby was looking at the big National Conference of Catholic Bishops name tag I was wearing.
One of them said, "You're not a bishop."
I explained that obviously I wasn't a bishop but that I work for the bishops.
The man looked a little closer at my name tag and then said to his wife, "He's in charge of social development and world peace."
She was clearly not impressed. She said, "Well, judging by the morning newspaper, he needs to do a better job."
Our department has basically four tasks. First, we help the bishops communicate Catholic social teaching. For example, the bishops issued a statement on the 100th anniversary of Rerum novarum that summarized a century of social teaching.
Second, we help the bishops apply that teaching to major domestic and international policy issues such as policies affecting children and families, the budget, arms, and human life and dignity.
Third, we assist the bishops in advocating for Catholic values and principles in the public arena, both in Congress and with the administration. Right now, we're deeply involved in legislative battles as diverse as welfare reform, land mines, and the earned-income tax credit.
Finally, and this is perhaps our most important task, we work to build the capacity of the church to fulfill its social mission. Probably the best example of that is the bishops' recent document on parish social ministry, "Communities of Salt and Light."
Because we are a department of the bishops' conference, it is the bishops who set our agenda. That means that we cannot act on a particular policy or issue unless that action is in fact based on policies adopted by the bishops. So we don't move very fast. But once the conference has clearly established its policy, we can sometimes be a powerful force.
GIVE US AN example.
RECENTLY WE TOOK UP IN a serious way the issue of land mines. This may seem like a very small piece of a very big issue, but the Vatican and bishops around the world had repeatedly asked the U.S. church to take the lead in dealing with the millions of land mines scattered around the earth.
Some 26,000 people, most of them kids, are killed or maimed by land mines every year. In Cambodia and Angola, for example, there are more land mines than there are children.
Land mines don't discriminate between civilians and combatants or even between periods of peace and war. It takes about $3 to bury a land mine, but it takes more than $1,000 to remove one.
It's a horrible scourge, and we have a great responsibility because the United States produces and has exported them. There's no getting rid of them without an active U.S. leadership role.
So last summer the bishops' conference adopted a statement on land mines and we intensified our lobbying of Congress and the administration, urging them to take the lead in establishing worldwide restraints on land mines. We were able to raise the moral dimensions and the human dimensions of what was previously debated as just a military matter.
When the Senate recently passed a moratorium on land-mine use, the author of that legislation, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), acknowledged that it wouldn't have been passed without the concerted effort of the Catholic community.
So that's a small example of where our efforts have resulted in something concrete.
WHERE ELSE HAVE YOU focused your public-policy efforts?
Recently our main focus has been on domestic issues. Last year we concentrated on health-care reform, and this year we have been spending much of our energy seeking to influence the welfare-reform debate.
The framework we have been using in evaluating the various welfare-reform proposals is how they touch poor children and vulnerable families. The earned-income tax credit is a high priority for us, as are aspects of housing and health care.
On health care, we're focusing more on Medicaid than Medicare. There are a lot of groups—well-organized, well-funded, powerful groups in Washington—that worry about how proposed changes will affect seniors, but not many groups are focused on how they will affect poor kids.
Several of these issues have prolife and abortion dimensions, so we work closely with the bishops' prolife office and have been active with this Congress on prolife issues as well.
In Washington, international issues get reduced to 15-second sound bites. The sound bite for our international agenda would be: "fewer weapons, more development."
Unfortunately, the United States ranks at the top in arms exports and near the bottom, on a per-capita basis, in the development aid we provide abroad. We believe our country ought to reverse those ratios.
WHAT'S YOUR VIEW OF THE SHIFT in public policy over the last couple of years?
I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE are frustrated. They're not happy with the status quo, and they want change. They don't think government is working well, and they don't think their dollars are well used.
In 1992 Americans voted for change and, frankly, they didn't get much change. So two years later they voted again for change, and now they're getting some. But the polls seem to indicate that people are a little nervous about some of the change they are getting.
DO YOU FIND THOSE polls reassuring?
JUST TO A CERTAIN extent. Medicare is the most popular government program in America. Everybody's mother is at some point going to be on Medicare. But how does that translate to other issues?
The Democrats—and I don't want to overgeneralize—seem to have lost not only the votes in the Congress, but to a certain extent many have lost their voice and maybe even their values. They spend more time complaining about things like Newt Gingrich's book—waving ketchup bottles around—than making their case. Their party won't even begin to have a conversation about unborn children.
The Republicans seem to be so set on pushing through their "revolution" that there's not much room for dialogue. It's become a matter of discipline rather than discussion.
So despite all the changes, people continue to be frustrated. Political money is still a very dominant force. Partisan gamesmanship continues in both the White House and Congress. And there's a lot more bumper-sticker and sound-bite discussion than real dialogue.
Many Americans have become cynical. We are facing a real problem in the fact that people are so disconnected from their government and mistrust its capacity to do anything well.
The populace seems preoccupied by the sideshows of politics. We know a lot more about Whitewater than we know about Bosnia. We know a lot more about Packwood than we know about the budget. We're seeing the trivialization of politics, and the media plays into that.
The public debate is increasingly polarized, with people like Rush Limbaugh and Louis Farrakhan—whatever you think of them—setting the agenda.
HOW DOES THIS KIND OF POLITICAL culture affect policymaking?
A KEY PROBLEM IS THAT WE END UP with these funny false choices. In the family-values debate, for example, you've got one crowd that says, "What we really need is more personal responsibility, more time with our kids, more sexual restraint, more good, old-fashioned morality."
Then another group says, "What we really need are better jobs with better wages, better health care. Family leave would help. Raise the minimum wage." As if you had to choose between those!
In the Catholic community, we are strong advocates of moral values. We preach and teach sexual responsibility and sacrifice for children every day. But we're also advocates for helping families deal with the problems in their lives. Decent jobs, decent wages, health care, and family leave are all part of our agenda.
So our Catholic agenda doesn't fit the categories very well, which occasionally confuses the people in Washington, but is also a source of some respect.
WHAT'S THE KEY IN YOUR approach to public-policy work?
WE'RE NOT A POLITICAL-INTEREST group, we're a community of faith. We don't build our agenda based on polls. We don't do a lot of focus groups.
The Catholic Church has been called a lot of things, but we've never been called trendy. So we don't wake up in the morning and say, "How do we reshape our agenda today?"
As Catholic advocates, we're not free to abandon the unborn because they're politically incorrect. We're not free to walk away from immigrants because they don't vote. We're not free to forget about kids and poverty because welfare mothers are stereotyped.
The American Medical Association and the National Rifle Association make their deals. They can play the Washington game, which in many respects is determined by the power of money, endorsements, and political-action committees.
We don't do any of that. But we bring to the political process some assets that other people don't have. What we have that can make a difference is a set of strong convictions and values.
HOW WELL, REALISTICALLY, can convictions and values compete with the political power of money?
THERE IS RESPECT FOR the consistency of our convictions. When we make the case against the family cap in welfare reform, many legislators respect our consistent stance for life and understand our concern that these proposals will hurt kids and encourage abortion.
We worked for these same values and principles when the Democrats ran Congress and the Republicans were in the White House. Political changes don't really reshape our Catholic agenda.
But what counts perhaps more than those convictions is our vast experience. When policymakers listen to the Catholic community, it's not so much because of what we believe as what we do every day. The Catholic Church is the largest nongovernmental provider of health care, the largest nongovernmental educator, and the largest nongovernmental human-service system in the country.
So when you're talking about welfare and ask, "Who feeds the hungry? Who shelters the homeless? Who helps people leave welfare and go to work?", we do that as a Catholic community every day all across the country. That's the reason we can sometimes get a hearing even when legislators don't agree with our policies.
We also have a structure in every congressional district that can help. When we work on family caps or land mines or trying to protect the unborn, we're not just a "Washington voice." There are more parishes in this country than there are post offices; and we have diocesan structures, state Catholic Conferences, and individual bishops picking up the phone.
It's bringing together those three things—the values Catholics hold, the work we do, and the people we are—that can on occasion make a difference.
WHAT ARE THE THEOLOGICAL foundations for your public-policy work? There are still many Catholics who say the church shouldn't get mixed up in the dirty business of politics.
I'VE HEARD THAT ONE. You just have to be really clear that this is a work of faith. Our involvement isn't based on a political option or a secular or ideological preference of a few religious leaders.
This involvement goes back to Jesus in the synagogue in Nazareth. He unrolled the scrolls and said, "The spirit of the Lord is upon me. I bring good news to the poor, liberty to captives, new sight to the blind."
What does it mean to bring good news to the poor when, in the richest nation on earth, a fourth of our preschoolers are growing up poor? What does it mean to bring liberty to captives with so much addiction and materialism and consumerism that enslaves us? What does it mean to bring new sight to the blind in a society where we are often blinded to the dignity and lives of unborn children, poor kids, and people with disabling conditions?
Before you get to the church's social teaching, you've got to start with the life and words of Jesus. And Jesus said it clearly: we'll be judged by our response to the least among us.
In these days, that challenge is very direct. You can't walk from the el train to your offices here in Chicago without walking by homeless people who—if you believe our tradition—are in effect "Jesus in disguise for us," as Mother Teresa says.
So you start with the scriptures, which are at the heart of our faith, and then you look at the principles of social teaching that the Catholic Church has developed over the last 100 years. That's a remarkable policy framework.
WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE principles of Catholic social teaching, and how do they apply to the political situation in the U.S.?
WE BEGIN WITH THE LIFE AND DIGNITY of the human person. Everyone has a right to life and dignity; it's not something you have to earn by your good behavior; it's something you have as a child of God.
Our tradition talks about both human rights and responsibilities. We believe human dignity is realized in community—that human life is not only sacred but also social. So we have rights and we have responsibilities to each other. That leads to the importance of the family, a sense of community, a sense of participation.
Another important principle of Catholic social teaching is the "option for the poor." We believe that the justice of a society is measured by how the weakest are doing. If that's the standard, we in the United States are in some trouble.
Then finally, there is the notion of solidarity, which is really the core of John Paul II's contribution to Catholic social teaching. He reminds us all—whether we're in Haiti, in the United States, in the Philippines, or in Poland—that we're brothers and sisters, whatever our differences.
We need to understand that political involvement based on these principles is an exercise of faith and not some political adventure. If the church came across as partisan—either right or left, Democrat or Republican—people would stop listening.
IF YOU'RE SO WORRIED ABOUT not being identified as either right or left, how can you take a stand on an issue in a meaningful way?
I THINK IT'S EASY TODAY. Let's take what the Holy Father said when he was here. If protecting the unborn, caring for the poor, welcoming newcomers, and defending the weak is our Catholic agenda, there's no political party or ideology where we "fit."
When you stand up for human life in the abortion mills of America and on death row and in the villages of Africa, you've pulled yourself out of the constraints of the American political context.
So one day we're working with the Christian Coalition on protecting the unborn, and the next day we're working with the ACLU on capital punishment.
But in either case, we share the Catholic message clearly and without compromise.
We're not going to turn away from the unborn because liberals don't like that, and we're not going to walk away from poor kids because conservatives are in the ascendancy. We are going to be who we are.
HOW RECEPTIVE IS our current political culture to that message?
RIGHT NOW, IT'S NOT VERY receptive at all. What's going on—not just in Congress but in our society as a whole—is a tendency to turn away from the poor and little focus on questions of justice and peace.
We have a society that's turning inward: perhaps neo-isolationist, frustrated by the failures to overcome poverty in the past and tempted by political leaders and their own frustrations to turn away from the challenge to work for justice and peace and to combat poverty.
Despite our efforts, we have not been able to protect the unborn. We have more poor children in this country now than we have had in a long time.
What we're trying to do right now, both with the administration and the Congress, is limit the damage in the short run, but do that in a way that increases our capacity and our credibility to affect the debate in the long run. This country is going to have to face questions of poverty and international responsibility again. We're trying to lay the groundwork for making a difference in the future.
So ours is a countercultural message, but it provides a moral framework that allows Catholics, along with people of differing convictions, differing faiths, or no faith, to make a contribution.
You're against abortion, but at the same time you're against an increase in the number of poor children. Some today argue that without abortions, there would be even more poor children.
CARDINAL BERNARD LAW said it very starkly. "No mother, however poor, however young, should be forced to choose between a poor child and a dead child." This country ought to be able to offer something better than that horrible choice.
The bishops' new Political Responsibility Statement says, "We stand up for children in the womb and on welfare." There aren't many groups that can say that. To us, that's a matter of consistency.
Perhaps Pope John Paul II put it best, when, standing in the rain in Giant Stadium last fall, he called us to welcome the newcomer, stand up for the weak, defend the unborn, and reach out to the poor.
If there were one way to summarize what our department is about, it's the message of the Holy Father when he was here. His last words to us, as he was leaving from the Baltimore tarmac, were: "America, love life, cherish life, defend life, from conception to natural death."
That challenges everybody—right and left, Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, prolifers and social-justice advocates, Catholics and non-Catholics. That's the kind of message that needs to be heard. We see it as our task to call people to that message.
But the general public impression still seems to be that abortion is the only issue the Catholic Church cares deeply about. The threats some bishops made a few years ago of excommunicating politicians, for example, did not seem to reflect this whole "consistent life ethic."
IT'S NOT ONLY HIERARCHS WHO are tempted to cross a line here. There are Catholic politicians who say, "I am in principle opposed to abortion, but on this issue I'm willing to waive those principles for reasons of civility or pluralism or getting elected."
I think you have a serious problem when one party that has drawn the allegiance of Catholics for a long time won't even talk about the right to life of the unborn. Naturally, that has to cause a strong reaction, and many Catholics have walked away from that party.
Similarly, we as Catholics have concerns about a political agenda that seems to place a very low priority on the poor and be actively hostile to immigrants.
There was a period in my adolescence when my dad was the local Democratic precinct chairman and my mother was the Republican precinct chairwoman, so I believe people can work for these values in different ways.
Catholics are very active in both parties, but a lot of "consistent ethic" Catholics are feeling politically homeless right now. There's no one party, no one movement, and, frankly, not a lot of candidates that represent a consistent commitment to human life and human dignity.
This is not an excuse for disengagement but a call to shape a new politics that challenges both parties to measure their policies by how they touch the least among us, especially children—born and unborn.
Do average Americans know that the Catholic Church has this whole other social-justice agenda? There doesn't seem to be as much press about the church standing up for poor children as about the church opposing abortion.
ABORTION GETS THE MOST visibility for a couple reasons. One is that it's such a profoundly moral question. With a society destroying a million and a half kids a year, we ought to be spending a lot of time and energy talking about that.
Another reason is that the media likes to cover it because it's such a strongly polarized issue. Most journalists are prochoice and see the church as the most powerful opponent of that agenda.
The other reality is that the media doesn't cover much of anything having to do with poverty. What's being covered now is not: "What will welfare-reform legislation do for poor families?" It's: "Will Clinton or will Gingrich win?"—a horse race.
Washington is a place that never lets substance get in the way of scandal or politics. The political choices debated right now have enormous human consequences, but they're getting very little attention.
One of the biggest decisions this Congress is debating is to substantially cut the earned-income tax credit. But most Americans haven't got a clue what the earned-income tax credit is, even those who get it. In many ways, it's the best kind of government program because there's no bureaucracy and it's a direct help to those in need.
This credit helps working families close the gap between their wages and the poverty level so they can raise their kids in dignity.
The earned-income tax credit used to be a bipartisan program, but it's very vulnerable right now and being cut substantially. Unfortunately, you're not hearing much from the White House or the media about this.
But in our lobbying efforts the earned-income tax credit is one of our highest priorities, a classic example of the kind of issue that reflects our values—concern for children, support of work, support of families. So we stand up for that when few others do.
HOW IS YOUR POLITICAL activity different from that of the Christian Coalition?
IN THIS ELECTION YEAR, the Christian Coalition and its Catholic Alliance are just one example of political groups recruiting Catholics for their political agenda.
While anyone can reach out to Catholics, it seems ironic that evangelical Protestants would presume to assist Catholics in entering the public square, since we've been there for decades—in both political parties and in the labor, prolife, peace, and other social-justice movements.
I believe the test for any political-interest group seeking to reach Catholics is: how consistent and comprehensive is their concern for human life and human dignity.
In their Political Responsibility statement, the bishops ask conservative and profamily groups where "the least of these"—including the poor, the hungry, and the homeless—are in their agenda. And they ask progressive organizations whether they will stand up for the weakest among us—the unborn children.
The test for such groups is whether their faith shapes their politics, or is it the other way around? I believe the bishops' Political Responsibility statement provides a far better framework for Catholic political involvement than the selective and often partisan agendas of the Christian Coalition and its liberal counterparts.
HOW CONSISTENT CAN YOU BE as a Catholic Church advocate when you become an active player in a democratic system that depends on reaching compromises? Don't you inevitably have to compromise on your convictions and values to be part of that process?
IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE CLEAR what we are and what we are not. We're not the U.S. government; we're a church. So, no, we don't have to compromise on our values.
Years ago there was a feeling—and I grew up with it—that religion and politics didn't meet. The problem, though, is this: if the fundamental values that people have—many of them rooted in their religious convictions—are kept out of the public debate, you end up with barren public discussions. Then decisions will be made based solely on matters of politics and technology.
Today the nation may be learning that it's a good thing for people to bring their values, including their religious values, into public life. But faith is not a substitute for facts. You have to persuade, not just proclaim.
In our advocacy, our department tries to be strategic and smart. In the current debate on the earned-income tax credit, we're not saying: increase it by $100 million. We're saying: don't cut it as much as you're proposing. But that doesn't compromise our values.
One of the dangers is that when religious bodies get involved—if they're not careful, if they're not clear about their identity, values, and tactics—they can become just another interest group, only more righteous.
The bishops' conference doesn't do endorsements. We don't do voter guides. And we don't need Catholic Pat Robertsons or Jesse Jacksons—religious leaders with political ambitions. We need religious leaders who understand that our faith has implications for public life.
IF, AS YOU SAY, the Catholic agenda and message today is countercultural, how is it faring out in the parishes?
I REALLY BELIEVE CATHOLIC social teaching and social ministry is in better shape today than it's ever been since the Sermon on the Mount. I think the teaching is clearer, and there are more people and parishes working at this in a serious way.
Within the Catholic community, there is a growing awareness of the importance of acting on one's faith. I'm encouraged by the positive reception of the "Communities of Salt and Light" statement, which emphasizes the importance of the parish's social mission.
I grew up in a middle-class Catholic parish where little happened in terms of social mission. In the parish I'm in today, we're not great, but social ministry is definitely a part of our parish life.
We really have only begun to realize our potential. Is it clear enough to all believers that it is Jesus—not some secular or political agenda—that calls us to care about the poor? When we hear Jesus' words, do we feel a personal responsibility? And then, do we understand that that responsibility has social dimensions?
Catholics today increasingly understand that their faith shapes how they raise their kids, what they do at their work, what they choose as consumers. They understand that their faith is much more than Sunday morning. But we need to extend that understanding by promoting a greater sense of the social and political dimensions of our faith.
In our parishes we need to provide people with tools and vehicles. Legislative networks, community organizing, prolife and social-justice groups, and taking the lasagna to the soup kitchen are all ways in which people can begin to get a sense that they are in fact acting on their faith. We're about trying to be the leaven in society—in our individual and family lives, but also in our community lives.
The message the bishops are trying to get out is that social ministry is not just something for the seven or eight people who like that sort of thing and do it on behalf of the rest of us. Social ministry is central to the parish life. Part of being a believer means working for a community more respectful of human life and human dignity.
HOW DO YOU REACH individual Catholics who may not necessarily have a great interest in the social and political implications of their faith?
YOU DON'T BEGIN WITH "thou shalts" and guilt and that sort of stuff. You begin with the fact that many people want their faith to make a difference in their own lives and in other people's lives. They want for other people's kids what they want for their kids.
So you don't just hit them over the head with 150-page pastoral letters. You begin with people's experiences.
There used to be a debate in social-ministry circles about whether you should do service or action. You've got to do both.
Unless people have done the lasagna and spent a night in a shelter and reached out to people, a lot of the passion is not going to be there.
You won't have much credibility if all you do is read action alerts and memos from our department. As Christians, we're called to both serve the poor and stand with the poor.
In terms of reaching ordinary people, I think you begin with where they are. You help them find opportunities to act on their faith. You try to make that as good an experience as it can be. Finding ways in which people can make a real difference is important. You often involve their kids.
People don't wake up in the morning and say, "Gee, what I need to do today is help the Catholic bishops prevail on the welfare bill." They have a thousand other things to do before that one.
And we have to try to get beyond the stereotype of the grim, intense social-justice activist. People have to get some sense of satisfaction and achievement and even a little fun out of this. We have to find a language and approaches that invite people in rather than push them away.
THE BISHOPS RECENTLY ISSUED their new Political Responsibility Statement, a document your office prepared, that gives some directions for this election year. What are the main points?
THIS STATEMENT, LIKE THOSE ISSUED in previous election years, is an effort to encourage people to become active and involved citizens and to address the church's responsibilities in this election year. Those responsibilities include raising the moral dimensions of public issues, educating about those issues, and encouraging citizens to register and vote.
As expressed in its subtitle, this particular statement focuses on three ideas. The first one is "proclaiming the gospel of life"—that human life is sacred and ought to be protected from its beginning to its end. The second is "protecting the least among us"—the poor, the vulnerable, the elderly, and the children, born and unborn, who are at risk. And the third is "pursuing the common good"—an often missing element in the current dialogue.
This particular statement also addresses some of the frustration and cynicism people have about politics. It calls on Catholics not to withdraw from public life but to bring their values into that arena.
It also addresses a whole range of key political issues, including abortion, families and children, capital punishment, education, immigration, violence, the arms trade, and the economy.
There's a phrase in this statement that summarizes what the bishops are saying about the church's role. It says, "The challenge for our church is to be principled without being ideological, to be political without being partisan, to be civil without being soft, to be involved without being used."
The bishops call us as Catholics to stand up for certain basic values, but the means to attain those values is something people of good will can disagree about.
We're not the Democratic Party at prayer or the religious caucus of the Republican Party.
We shouldn't attack or impugn other people's motives, but we have to stand up in the public arena for our values.
Finally, we have to be involved but don't want to be a front for any particular partisan or ideological agenda. This year a lot of people will be going after Catholic parishes, trying to use them for their own political purposes without engaging Catholic values on a consistent basis.
Obviously, I have a certain bias about this, but I think this is our best Political Responsibility Statement thus far. If your readers in the parishes can encourage others to get active and informed without getting used, that will be really important.
The bishops are hoping that as we make important choices about the values and the leaders that will guide our nation, we'll look beyond the 30-second commercials and our own personal preconceptions to reflect on how our choices touch human life and human dignity.
They affirm that "in the Catholic tradition, citizenship is a virtue and participation in the political process is an obligation."
This statement also gives some directions on the dos and don'ts for parishes. It explains that telling people how to vote and religious tests for candidates are "pastorally inappropriate, theologically unsound, and politically unwise"—and they also happen to be illegal.
WHAT ROLE CAN Catholic parishes play?
A NUMBER OF PARISHES HOLD nonpartisan voter-registration drives. Others organize candidate forums on a nonpartisan basis, inviting the candidates running for office to come and answer people's questions on a whole range of issues.
Some parishes distribute nonpartisan Catholic voter-education materials. A number of state Catholic conferences provide questionnaires to candidates, and parishes print the responses in their bulletins. But it's important that such questionnaires really are voter-education materials and not partisan propaganda. Each candidate needs to have a chance to reply. They've got to be on a range of issues and can't endorse candidates.
MUCH OF YOUR POLITICAL ACTIVITY is by nature reactive to the things going on in Washington. But, stepping back from that for a moment, what are some of the positive contributions Catholic social teaching could make to improving the social and economic order in the U.S.?
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I think American Catholics can bring to the public debate in this country is the broad approach of Catholic social teaching to economics.
This has never been a country or, for that matter, a church attracted by Marxist theories. Our tradition says that markets have not only advantages, they also have limitations. There are some common goods like the environment or health care where the market by itself isn't sufficient to meet the requirements of justice, human life, and human dignity.
There may be parts of our society that need to develop a greater appreciation for the economic and other advantages of markets, but what seems to be lacking more in this country is a greater appreciation of their limitations.
What I find disturbing is when people who are ideologically driven look at Catholic social teaching and pick out the things they really like. "I love the option for the poor, but this stuff about abortion I don't really like." Or the reverse.
The same is true with economics. There is a temptation to affirm the church's strong support of private property and our teaching on the limitation of government and to ignore the emphasis on solidarity, the responsibilities of government, and the limits of private property. Or vice versa.
Selective orthodoxy is a risk for all of us. We have a very rich tradition, and we can't reduce it to bumper-sticker messages.
We have remarkable resources in Catholic social teaching and a powerful example in Pope John Paul II.
It is time for Catholics to stand up for vulnerable children, born and unborn; to resist the violence in a culture reflected in widespread abortion, increasing capital punishment, growing advocacy of euthanasia, and indifference to the deadly consequences of poverty at home and abroad.
When John Paul II came to our country, he asked: "Is present-day America becoming less sensitive, less caring toward the poor, the weak, the stranger, the needy? It must not." We must accept his challenge and do all we can to insure that America does not.—END
© 1997 by Claretian Publications
Return to Main | Return to Archive Index